Does NEC gives complete protection for human ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
kalanjeya

kalanjeya

Member
Location
chennai
In a dwelling unit , as per NEC , for protecting human , we are proposing GFCI Receptacles only for countertop receptacles in the kitchen and whether proof receptacles with GFCI at balcony or utility.

Does't NEC thought about Electric range ? If anyone of the four coil goes wrong , it would directly contact with cooking appliances (most of these are metals) and human too.

On what basis it is permitting GFCI protection only for counter top receptacles?.

Kalanjeya
 
Keep in mind the NEC is a minimum standard
GFCI rules are based on potential shock hazard.
You can add GFCI for range if you feel it is necessary
 
I don't think GFCI protection is needed for electric ranges, and I don't consider it unsafe to omit such protection.

A GFCI breaker or receptacle is designed to protect a human against shock in circumstances that do not involve an equipment grounding conductor. Many kitchen appliances have 2-prong plugs, and thus do not have an EGC. Those that have 3-prong plugs can be located close to the sink, and could get splashed from time to time. That is why GFCI protection is needed for kitchen countertop receptacles.

However, the current-carrying conductors that are internal to the stovetop heating elements are well protected and well insulated. The only failure mechanism I have heard about is an open circuit (i.e., from a broken coil). I have never heard of a heating element for which the ceramic (or other insulation material) broke apart, allowing a bare conductor to come into contact with a pot sitting on the element. I am not at all sure that it could happen, without there also being a break in the conductor.

By the way, there are other places that GFCI receptacles are required (i.e., other than kitchen countertops and outdoors. See 210.8.
 
"On what basis it is permitting GFCI protection only for counter top receptacles?. "

There is an important distinction between "permitting" and "requiring".
 
finnegan said:
"On what basis it is permitting GFCI protection only for counter top receptacles?. "

There is an important distinction between "permitting" and "requiring".
Click to expand...

The NEC does not permit GFCI for countertops it REQUIRES it.
 
Keep in mind that the range is GROUNDED. Things that plug into countertop receptacles may or may not be grounded. GFCI protection is good for those items that may not be grounded. A properly grounded appliance is safer than a GFCI protected appliance in every way. GFCI is NOT a substitute for proper grounding and bonding.
 
Re: Does NEC gives complete protection for human ?

kalanjeya said:
On what basis it is permitting GFCI protection ONLY for counter top receptacles?
Click to expand...
I may be wrong, but I think kalanjeya was wondering why the NEC requires GFCI for the countertop receptacles, and forbids it elsewhere. Note my emphasis above on the word "only."

If that is what kalanjeya meant, then the statement is not true, as others have already pointed out.
 
charlie b said:
Many kitchen appliances have 2-prong plugs, and thus do not have an EGC. Those that have 3-prong plugs can be located close to the sink, and could get splashed from time to time. That is why GFCI protection is needed for kitchen countertop receptacles.
Click to expand...

Charlie do you have inside info?

I think it could be argued the reason we need GFCIs in kitchens, garages, basement, crawl spaces, bathrooms, outside etc. has more to do with the likely hood of the potential victim being 'grounded' through damp floors (basement, crawls) or grounded plumbing parts.

If we removed all the grounded parts in a bathroom there would be no need for GFCIs water or not.
 
iwire said:
If we removed all the grounded parts in a bathroom there would be no need for GFCIs water or not.
Click to expand...
A reasonable statement, except that water itself, while traveling down the drain, represents a potential ground path.

iwire said:
I think it could be argued the reason we need GFCIs . . . has more to do with the likely hood of the potential victim being "grounded. . . ."
Click to expand...
I was addressing the source of the shock. You are addressing the path the shock would take, on its way back to the source. I think we are both right.

But my intended point is that a GFCI is there to protect you in those circumstances in which an EGC cannot protect you. One obvious circumstance is when there is no EGC. That does not apply to a range, as haskindm and I have already mentioned. Another circumstance is when an appliance or tool or their cords gets damaged or gets wet. That is more likely to happen in a kitchen, bathroom, basement, outdoor area, or garage, and less likely to happen in a dining room or a bedroom.

iwire said:
Charlie do you have inside info?
Click to expand...
If I answered that question, I wouldn't be "inside" anymore, as the other "insiders" would kick me outside. Or did I just blow my own cover? :shock: 8) :lol:
 
finnegan said:
"On what basis it is permitting GFCI protection only for counter top receptacles?. "

There is an important distinction between "permitting" and "requiring".
Click to expand...

I may be wrong , but the subject is clear .

kalanjeya
 
haskindm said:
Keep in mind that the range is GROUNDED. Things that plug into countertop receptacles may or may not be grounded. GFCI protection is good for those items that may not be grounded. A properly grounded appliance is safer than a GFCI protected appliance in every way. GFCI is NOT a substitute for proper grounding and bonding.
Click to expand...


Well !

This case i would like to open my knowledge here.( I may be wrong)

Eventhough the range has got proper grounding , During fault , grounding

conductor would byepass the fault current , but OCPD will not sence the

ground fault . So , during fault situation , if some one touch the coil

surface or any fault portion , he would be electrocuted .

(I just wanted to improve my practical knowledge).

kalanjeya
 
kalanjeya said:
I just wanted to improve my practical knowledge.
Click to expand...
That's very encouraging. We should all want that. I hope we can help you with your quest.

kalanjeya said:
I may be wrong.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but you are wrong. The normal path for current to flow is from the source (via the "hot conductor"), through the load, and back to the source (via the neutral conductor).

During a fault, there is a second path for current to flow. It is from the source (again via the "hot conductor"), to the fault point inside the equipment, to the case of the equipment, to the point at which the Equipment Grounding Conductor (EGC) is connected to the case, then back to the main panel (via the EGC), and finally internal to the main panel it connects back to the source. That will be a low resistance current path, and the current will be very high. The overcurrent device will sense this high current, and it will trip. That is the one, and only one, purpose for the EGC.
 
The members of the NFPA are not supposed to accept a proposal unless there is an adequete techincal substantiation. Typically this includes doucmented cases of bad things that have happened, not bad things that could happen. With that said, if there are enough people that die from contact with electric ranges, look for the consumer product safety commission to propose a requirement. Until there are some dead bodies, however, don't expect this to be required.
 
haskindm wrote:

A properly grounded appliance is safer than a GFCI protected appliance in every way
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure that is always true. Why aren't toasters grounded? I was told that they are intentionally ungrounded so that people probing around in there with a metal object wont get zapped.
 
Kalanjeya, I once worked at a restaurant. I was working in the back, and was putting a big pot of chili on the 500? range. The pot was heavy, and I lost my balance, and spilled half the chili on the cord that was plugged into the wall, for the chili stove.

The chili shorted from phase to ground, and phase to phase (I presume - at the time I wouldn't have known what happened). There was a huge flash, and the breaker kicked instantly.

Thanks to the Equipment Grounding Conductor, the breaker was able to kick quickly, and I am alive. GFCI protection is not necessary on well-bonded equipment, IMO.
 
georgestolz said:
The chili shorted from phase to ground, and phase to phase (I presume - at the time I wouldn't have known what happened). There was a huge flash, and the breaker kicked instantly.
Click to expand...

Now that is some 'hot' chili, Roger will be stopping by to try it out. :lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top